Bratnia

Yep, near perfectly timed the pre Sunak/GE announcement drop.

In 1999 you could buy a £100 legal tender Britannia for a little over £150 (£157.03 am gold fix 10th September 1999).
Of course the Sovereign and its £1 legal tender value and 0.2354 ounces of gold content kept the coin £1 and gold value aligned for many years (£4.248/oz) i.e. between 1696 to 1930 (when the UK ended the gold standard and the US followed that lead by compulsory purchasing all American gold in January 1933).
Gold being finite and broadly there was near 0% inflation over the 1696 to 1930 years. Those with gold (Sovereigns) could deposit/lend them for interest - that was a real rate of return, and some decent interest at that. Stocks were purely speculative, barely on average rewarding the same as bonds, most savers avoided stocks. Nowadays by the time you factor in costs, taxes and inflation (currency debasement), you're lucky to get a 0% real return from the likes of bonds/Gilts/Treasury's i.e. the borrower (state/king) pay nothing to borrow. Indeed there's little need to borrow when you have a money printing press (where each new £1 printed/spent benefits the 'counterfeiter' at the expense of devaluing all other Pounds in circulation. Savers are forced into stocks in order to potentially achieve real gains.
So the transition from the British (Pound) to American (Dollar) empire following Britain bankrupting itself during WW1, has led to greater risk/less reward for savers, greater benefit to the state/president, enabling the US to print/buy a massive military might and do moon shots ...etc. The US exports inflation onto others. Little wonder that many (70% of the world population and rising) are looking to move away from using the US dollar for international trade settlements.
Britain could have been at the heart of such a alternative, however for that it would have to appear to be neutral and stable/safe, instead our government takes the total opposite tact. Was once the heart/centre of the time-zone, accounting, law, finance, a centre of excellence. Now and MP's repeatedly demonstrate parliament to be a liability rather than a asset.

Reported for bragging.

I match a equal amount in stock value (so also bought £80K of VMIG) alongside some cash for both, so time/averaging tends to see things work out OK (stocks down, gold up or vice-versa) ... so more a chicken than brave  Sale proceeds from selling down US$/US stocks that have become relatively overweighted and distorted by the Magnificent Seven.

Bought £80K worth of gold at around 2:30pm this afternoon, waltzed off, heard about the GE call on the car radio around a hour later and thought that would be good for gold ... only to see now that the £80K gold value is down by around £750. Swings and roundabouts. Often seems that way - prices drop after you buy, rise after you sell, but a few years down the line is forgotten, all averages out.

I was watching the market sniper and I like his TA take on the Gold chart currently. He's basically saying gold is now consolidating now and there will be some sideways action but the resistance has now turned into support and soon will be the next launch pad off for higher prices. So my advice to those who are stacking and want to continue to stack. Buy now when you have spare cash. I am and will be. The Bull run still has 6 years to go. 

In 1999 you could buy a £100 legal tender Britannia for a little over £150 (£157.03 am gold fix 10th September 1999).
Of course the Sovereign and its £1 legal tender value and 0.2354 ounces of gold content kept the coin £1 and gold value aligned for many years (£4.248/oz) i.e. between 1696 to 1930 (when the UK ended the gold standard and the US followed that lead by compulsory purchasing all American gold in January 1933).
Gold being finite and broadly there was near 0% inflation over the 1696 to 1930 years. Those with gold (Sovereigns) could deposit/lend them for interest - that was a real rate of return, and some decent interest at that. Stocks were purely speculative, barely on average rewarding the same as bonds, most savers avoided stocks. Nowadays by the time you factor in costs, taxes and inflation (currency debasement), you're lucky to get a 0% real return from the likes of bonds/Gilts/Treasury's i.e. the borrower (state/king) pay nothing to borrow. Indeed there's little need to borrow when you have a money printing press (where each new £1 printed/spent benefits the 'counterfeiter' at the expense of devaluing all other Pounds in circulation. Savers are forced into stocks in order to potentially achieve real gains.
So the transition from the British (Pound) to American (Dollar) empire following Britain bankrupting itself during WW1, has led to greater risk/less reward for savers, greater benefit to the state/president, enabling the US to print/buy a massive military might and do moon shots ...etc. The US exports inflation onto others. Little wonder that many (70% of the world population and rising) are looking to move away from using the US dollar for international trade settlements.
Britain could have been at the heart of such a alternative, however for that it would have to appear to be neutral and stable/safe, instead our government takes the total opposite tact. Was once the heart/centre of the time-zone, accounting, law, finance, a centre of excellence. Now and MP's repeatedly demonstrate parliament to be a liability rather than a asset.

In 1999 you could buy a £100 legal tender Britannia for a little over £150 (£157.03 am gold fix 10th September 1999).
Of course the Sovereign and its £1 legal tender value and 0.2354 ounces of gold content kept the coin £1 and gold value aligned for many years (£4.248/oz) i.e. between 1696 to 1930 (when the UK ended the gold standard and the US followed that lead by compulsory purchasing all American gold in January 1933).
Gold being finite and broadly there was near 0% inflation over the 1696 to 1930 years. Those with gold (Sovereigns) could deposit/lend them for interest - that was a real rate of return, and some decent interest at that. Stocks were purely speculative, barely on average rewarding the same as bonds, most savers avoided stocks. Nowadays by the time you factor in costs, taxes and inflation (currency debasement), you're lucky to get a 0% real return from the likes of bonds/Gilts/Treasury's i.e. the borrower (state/king) pay nothing to borrow. Indeed there's little need to borrow when you have a money printing press (where each new £1 printed/spent benefits the 'counterfeiter' at the expense of devaluing all other Pounds in circulation. Savers are forced into stocks in order to potentially achieve real gains.
So the transition from the British (Pound) to American (Dollar) empire following Britain bankrupting itself during WW1, has led to greater risk/less reward for savers, greater benefit to the state/president, enabling the US to print/buy a massive military might and do moon shots ...etc. The US exports inflation onto others. Little wonder that many (70% of the world population and rising) are looking to move away from using the US dollar for international trade settlements.
Britain could have been at the heart of such a alternative, however for that it would have to appear to be neutral and stable/safe, instead our government takes the total opposite tact. Was once the heart/centre of the time-zone, accounting, law, finance, a centre of excellence. Now and MP's repeatedly demonstrate parliament to be a liability rather than a asset.

In 1999 you could buy a £100 legal tender Britannia for a little over £150 (£157.03 am gold fix 10th September 1999).
Of course the Sovereign and its £1 legal tender value and 0.2354 ounces of gold content kept the coin £1 and gold value aligned for many years (£4.248/oz) i.e. between 1696 to 1930 (when the UK ended the gold standard and the US followed that lead by compulsory purchasing all American gold in January 1933).
Gold being finite and broadly there was near 0% inflation over the 1696 to 1930 years. Those with gold (Sovereigns) could deposit/lend them for interest - that was a real rate of return, and some decent interest at that. Stocks were purely speculative, barely on average rewarding the same as bonds, most savers avoided stocks. Nowadays by the time you factor in costs, taxes and inflation (currency debasement), you're lucky to get a 0% real return from the likes of bonds/Gilts/Treasury's i.e. the borrower (state/king) pay nothing to borrow. Indeed there's little need to borrow when you have a money printing press (where each new £1 printed/spent benefits the 'counterfeiter' at the expense of devaluing all other Pounds in circulation. Savers are forced into stocks in order to potentially achieve real gains.
So the transition from the British (Pound) to American (Dollar) empire following Britain bankrupting itself during WW1, has led to greater risk/less reward for savers, greater benefit to the state/president, enabling the US to print/buy a massive military might and do moon shots ...etc. The US exports inflation onto others. Little wonder that many (70% of the world population and rising) are looking to move away from using the US dollar for international trade settlements.
Britain could have been at the heart of such a alternative, however for that it would have to appear to be neutral and stable/safe, instead our government takes the total opposite tact. Was once the heart/centre of the time-zone, accounting, law, finance, a centre of excellence. Now and MP's repeatedly demonstrate parliament to be a liability rather than a asset.

In 1999 you could buy a £100 legal tender Britannia for a little over £150 (£157.03 am gold fix 10th September 1999).
Of course the Sovereign and its £1 legal tender value and 0.2354 ounces of gold content kept the coin £1 and gold value aligned for many years (£4.248/oz) i.e. between 1696 to 1930 (when the UK ended the gold standard and the US followed that lead by compulsory purchasing all American gold in January 1933).
Gold being finite and broadly there was near 0% inflation over the 1696 to 1930 years. Those with gold (Sovereigns) could deposit/lend them for interest - that was a real rate of return, and some decent interest at that. Stocks were purely speculative, barely on average rewarding the same as bonds, most savers avoided stocks. Nowadays by the time you factor in costs, taxes and inflation (currency debasement), you're lucky to get a 0% real return from the likes of bonds/Gilts/Treasury's i.e. the borrower (state/king) pay nothing to borrow. Indeed there's little need to borrow when you have a money printing press (where each new £1 printed/spent benefits the 'counterfeiter' at the expense of devaluing all other Pounds in circulation. Savers are forced into stocks in order to potentially achieve real gains.
So the transition from the British (Pound) to American (Dollar) empire following Britain bankrupting itself during WW1, has led to greater risk/less reward for savers, greater benefit to the state/president, enabling the US to print/buy a massive military might and do moon shots ...etc. The US exports inflation onto others. Little wonder that many (70% of the world population and rising) are looking to move away from using the US dollar for international trade settlements.
Britain could have been at the heart of such a alternative, however for that it would have to appear to be neutral and stable/safe, instead our government takes the total opposite tact. Was once the heart/centre of the time-zone, accounting, law, finance, a centre of excellence. Now and MP's repeatedly demonstrate parliament to be a liability rather than a asset.

In 1999 you could buy a £100 legal tender Britannia for a little over £150 (£157.03 am gold fix 10th September 1999).
Of course the Sovereign and its £1 legal tender value and 0.2354 ounces of gold content kept the coin £1 and gold value aligned for many years (£4.248/oz) i.e. between 1696 to 1930 (when the UK ended the gold standard and the US followed that lead by compulsory purchasing all American gold in January 1933).
Gold being finite and broadly there was near 0% inflation over the 1696 to 1930 years. Those with gold (Sovereigns) could deposit/lend them for interest - that was a real rate of return, and some decent interest at that. Stocks were purely speculative, barely on average rewarding the same as bonds, most savers avoided stocks. Nowadays by the time you factor in costs, taxes and inflation (currency debasement), you're lucky to get a 0% real return from the likes of bonds/Gilts/Treasury's i.e. the borrower (state/king) pay nothing to borrow. Indeed there's little need to borrow when you have a money printing press (where each new £1 printed/spent benefits the 'counterfeiter' at the expense of devaluing all other Pounds in circulation. Savers are forced into stocks in order to potentially achieve real gains.
So the transition from the British (Pound) to American (Dollar) empire following Britain bankrupting itself during WW1, has led to greater risk/less reward for savers, greater benefit to the state/president, enabling the US to print/buy a massive military might and do moon shots ...etc. The US exports inflation onto others. Little wonder that many (70% of the world population and rising) are looking to move away from using the US dollar for international trade settlements.
Britain could have been at the heart of such a alternative, however for that it would have to appear to be neutral and stable/safe, instead our government takes the total opposite tact. Was once the heart/centre of the time-zone, accounting, law, finance, a centre of excellence. Now and MP's repeatedly demonstrate parliament to be a liability rather than a asset.

In 1999 you could buy a £100 legal tender Britannia for a little over £150 (£157.03 am gold fix 10th September 1999).
Of course the Sovereign and its £1 legal tender value and 0.2354 ounces of gold content kept the coin £1 and gold value aligned for many years (£4.248/oz) i.e. between 1696 to 1930 (when the UK ended the gold standard and the US followed that lead by compulsory purchasing all American gold in January 1933).
Gold being finite and broadly there was near 0% inflation over the 1696 to 1930 years. Those with gold (Sovereigns) could deposit/lend them for interest - that was a real rate of return, and some decent interest at that. Stocks were purely speculative, barely on average rewarding the same as bonds, most savers avoided stocks. Nowadays by the time you factor in costs, taxes and inflation (currency debasement), you're lucky to get a 0% real return from the likes of bonds/Gilts/Treasury's i.e. the borrower (state/king) pay nothing to borrow. Indeed there's little need to borrow when you have a money printing press (where each new £1 printed/spent benefits the 'counterfeiter' at the expense of devaluing all other Pounds in circulation. Savers are forced into stocks in order to potentially achieve real gains.
So the transition from the British (Pound) to American (Dollar) empire following Britain bankrupting itself during WW1, has led to greater risk/less reward for savers, greater benefit to the state/president, enabling the US to print/buy a massive military might and do moon shots ...etc. The US exports inflation onto others. Little wonder that many (70% of the world population and rising) are looking to move away from using the US dollar for international trade settlements.
Britain could have been at the heart of such a alternative, however for that it would have to appear to be neutral and stable/safe, instead our government takes the total opposite tact. Was once the heart/centre of the time-zone, accounting, law, finance, a centre of excellence. Now and MP's repeatedly demonstrate parliament to be a liability rather than a asset.

Italian news feed are reporting "No more Raisi, he burn in heli"

Italian news feed are reporting "No more Raisi, he burn in heli"

In the Islamic calendar it's 1445, many who follow that act that way as well.

In the Islamic calendar it's 1445, many who follow that act that way as well.

Italian news feed are reporting "No more Raisi, he burn in heli"

In the Islamic calendar it's 1445, many who follow that act that way as well.

In the Islamic calendar it's 1445, many who follow that act that way as well.

In the Islamic calendar it's 1445, many who follow that act that way as well.

Was 2024 since beginning of year

£2024 be the end of the year 😄

£1909, still a decent stand on the day considering the attempt at slamming it back below £1900. 

Italian news feed are reporting "No more Raisi, he burn in heli"